OK, so hide the ISO types from the outside world. No problem. Is it OK to have getGeometryType and exportToWkb accept wkbVariant optional parameters?
P. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Even Rouault <even.roua...@mines-paris.org> wrote: > Selon Paul Ramsey <pram...@cleverelephant.ca>: > >> Back to this, is it OK? > > As said in > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2013-December/037738.html, > I feel a bit unconfortable with the extension of the OGRwkbGeometryType > enumeration that has possible impacts on other parts of OGR. There's perhaps a > time where we will touch it, but I'd expect it to ideally embrace Z, M, ZM, > circular geometries at once. And that would deserve a RFC. > > What do you think of keeping it an internal enumeration of OGR, since that's > probably all you need for now ? > > "Or have a separate OGRwkbIsoGeometryType enumeration { wkbPointIso, ... > wkbGeometryCollectionIso, wkbPointIsoZ, ... wkbGeometryCollectionIsoZ }, a > getIsoGeometryType() method that returns it, and the exportToWkb() methods > that calls int getGeometryType(OGRwkbVariant eVariant) { return (eVariant == > wkbVariantOgc) ? getGeometryType() : getIsoGeometryType(); }" > > I'd be happy to hear about other GDAL developers opinion on this. > >> How are we patching back to SVN? I can convert >> it into a patch and attach to a ticket, if that's the path. > > git-svn can be used to bridge the 2 worlds, but in my recent experience it has > been painful to use. So generating a patch and applying it is probably easier. > > Even > > -- > Geospatial professional services > http://even.rouault.free.fr/services.html > _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
